Transient Global Amnesia Recurrence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Transient global amnesia (TGA) is an acute amnestic disorder with unclear pathophysiology. Although considered a benign phenomenon, the possibility of a recurrence is a major concern for the patient. Our objective is to identify the prevalence and risk factors of relapse to help clinicians counsel patients about it. Methods: According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidance, we screened 1,658 studies from MEDLINE, Lilacs, and Embase databases, published from 1985 to April 2021, in English or Spanish. We included 36 observational case-control and cohort studies that included patients with TGA according to the Caplan or Hodges and Warlow diagnostic criteria. We performed a meta-analysis with a random effect model for proportions and calculation of odds ratio (OR) for identified risk factors. Methodological quality was assessed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: = 0.0288, respectively). Discussion: The analysis showed that approximately 1 of 8 participants may experience recurrence, with an increased risk in the case of a history or current state of migraine, depression, or sexual intercourse before the event. A personal history of migraine and depression was associated with 2 and 4 times risk, respectively.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".